Society grants many privileges to persons living within the society. Unfortunately, many persons abuse these privileges. For example, working for an employer is a privilege. Job applicants apply for sensitive positions in banks, corporate or government installations requiring access to sensitive information, or other jobs involving positions of trust. Other privileges are extended to persons applying for drivers licenses, taxicab licenses, security guards and so forth. Many of these job or license applicants are dishonest persons who have a prior criminal or an other undesirable record and seek to perpetrate further fraud on their prospective employers or the public with whom they come in contact with.
Ideally, the society would have a central data bank (with strict safeguards to protect individual rights) where data indicating prior undesirable or criminal activity and convictions, ideally both state and federal, were stored in a manner to permit an employer or public licensing agency to verify that a current job or license applicant does not have a prior criminal record. Recently, a handgun control proposal in the U.S. Senate, called for a quick check with a national data bank of known criminals. Unfortunately, no such data bank exists. One drawback in operating such a data bank is that it would be very large and thus difficult and costly to search for the data indicating such prior criminal activity. Another problem is that dishonest applicants can assume false identities which would prevent an effective search of the data bank entirely.
A classical solution would be to record fingerprints of all persons previously arrested for a crime and search the data bank for a fingerprint match. However, such a search for one fingerprint among millions, for each of many applicants is simply too time consuming, tedious, subject to error, and thus very costly, especially when large numbers of applicants must be verified each day. Also, since such applicants often assume false identities, the far simpler and less costly matching of names and social security numbers to retrieve the derogatory background data is futile for reasons to be explained. Thus there is a need to provide a solution to this problem which is far faster and less costly than straightforward classical fingerprint matching.
Also, a habitual criminal who continues to commit crimes is not privileged to be free to continue inflicting crimes on the public. The police and the courts of course are mandated to withdraw such privilege utilizing due process of law. However, the police departments cannot use the classical fingerprint matching process, involving millions of fingerprints in an accessed data bank, on a routine basis for everyday arrests due to the use of false identities and the data processing drawbacks mentioned above. It is also highly desirable to provide a method for public licensing agencies, the police and employers to verify past records of persons in a manner which is in part compatable with their currently and previously used personal identification data base (coarse biometric data) recorded on employment forms or arrest blotters. Setting up entirely new data banks is time consuming, costly and otherwise undesirable.
A similar type of fraud involves cheating government agencies by unlawfully obtaining multiple governmental benefits. In the description to follow, we emphasize this particular type of fraud. However the techniques described herein may also be employed to solve the aforesaid problems.
One person (Mr. Double Dipper) can get twice his normal quota of food stamps by assuming a false identity and getting a duplicate U.S. social security card and new number. He then uses the second social security number and a different name and address to get a second food stamp card at a different state administrated issue station than the station that issued the first food stamp card. He then applies twice each month at two different issue stations using two different names and addresses and the two different SS numbers. With food stamps issued to a family often with $200/month this ripoff costs the government billions of dollars a year. If ten foodstamp cards are obtained, by a cheater, using nine illicit social security numbers, the ripoff by a single person amounts to $1800 per month! The U.S. Department of Argiculture, exclusive of state contributions, spent 13.75 billion dollars in fiscal 1989 for the food stamp program alone. Assuming this fraud amounts to fifteen percent, this indicates a ripoff of the food stamp program of over two billion dollars in a single year alone. Welfare benefits are subjected to like cheating.
Ideally, we should like to protect the entire social security base nationwide, since illicitely obtaining two, three or even more social security numbers permits fraud in obtaining government benefits in addition to food stamps. For example, numerous persons have been criminally prosecuted and imprisoned for fraudulently obtaining multiple pensions from the social security system by applying for duplicate social security numbers. State and federal government sponsored access to medical care, welfare and the like is also vulnerable to this type of fraud costing taxpayers many millions more.
Also, the obtaining of duplicate social security numbers creates considerable havoc throughout the country in other ways. Merchants and banks rely on drivers licenses in extending credit, which licenses are keyed to social security numbers. Thus duplicate or triplicate false drivers licenses facilitate much commercial fraud. They also enable people to drive who have had their licenses suspended for drunk driving and other offenses, and additionally permit under-age persons to purchase liquor.
The Social Security Administration has in the past advised state agencies that is data base is wide open to fraud as people can assume false identities. The social security system is vulnerable to fraud since documents such as birth certificates which are used to obtain valid social security cards, can be either counterfeited or can easily be obtained fraudulently. With such "valid" cards, government benefits other than food stamps can be illicitly obtained. As reported in PR newswire Mar. 28, 1991, 247 illegal aliens were arrested with fraudulent social security cards used to get employment, drivers licenses and social security benefits. An Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Agriculture Department recently stated that one of the challenges the Secretary of Agriculture has asked us to face is the issue of fraud in the Food Stamp Program and to do all that is required to fight fraud. She further states that were talking about people who are ripping off taxpayers. See "Food & Nutrition", U.S. Govt Printing Office, Mar. 22, 1990. As reported in PR Newswire, Feb. 27, 1991, The Subcommittee on Social Security, Committee on Ways and Means, is to call on Congress to authorize the development of a "secure" social security number.
Furthermore, the problem is worldwide. A Brazilian newspaper recently reported large scale fraud in the social security system in Brazil amounting to 5.9 billion dollars U.S. Australia has social security fraud (The Economist, Apr. 15, 1989). In the U.K. fingerprints are being considered to weed out multiple applicants for social security benefits (Financial Times Ltd, Jul. 3, 1991).
As reported in "Supermarket News", Fairchild Publications, 1990, a Maryland food stamp program proposes issuance of debit cards to all food stamp recipients who can use the cards in automatic teller machines (ATMs) to obtain cash for buying food. Proponents state that this reduces fraud. However the ATM machine cannot distinguish between a bona fide card use or the use of a second "valid" card obtained by Mr. Double Dipper as explained above. Also, the cash so obtained can be used to buy items other than food to defeat the entire purpose of the program.
In view of the foregoing, there has been a long felt need to solve this problem. Unfortunately however, the social security data base is huge and people can readily assume false identities, to obtain multiple social security numbers used to fraudulently obtain other government benefits.